MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946717560 · doi:10.1111/polp.12302

Advocacy Coalition Framework and Policy Changes in a Third‐World Country

2019· article· en· W2946717560 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics &amp Policy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicy Transfer and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPublic administrationDemocracyWorkforcePolicy advocacyPolitical sciencePolicy analysisHealth policyLawHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work concerns health sector reform in Nigeria between 2003 and 2014. Using qualitative content analysis, I investigate the factors that led to the reform, the reform process, and its outcome. The objective is to assess the conformity of the policy reform to Sabatier and Weible's Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) in order to ascertain the applicability, or otherwise, of the ACF in policy analysis in stable democratic African states. In the article, external shock, policy subsystem, stable parameter, technical experts, advocacy coalitions, the “devil shift,” and policy core beliefs—which are basic components of ACF—were all identified in the policy reform process. I conclude that the ACF can be applied in policy reform in democratic African states, so long as there is the rule of law, a separation of powers, freedom of speech and association, a fairly stable political environment, and the presence of policy participants with expert knowledge of the policy issues. Related Articles Morris, Mary Hallock. 2007. “The Political Strategies of Winning and Losing Coalitions: Agricultural and Environmental Groups in the Debate over Hypoxia.” Politics & Policy 35 (4): 836‐871. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00086.x Swigger, Alexandra, and Bruce Timothy Heinmiller. 2014. “Advocacy Coalitions and Mental Health Policy: The Adoption of Community Treatment Orders in Ontario.” Politics & Policy 42 (2): 246‐270. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12066 Udjo, Eric O., and Barney Erasmus. 2014. “Impact of Retirement Age Policy on the Workforce of a Higher Education Institution in South Africa.” Politics & Policy 42 (5): 744‐768. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12092 Related Media CNBC Africa. 2017. “How Can Nigeria Improve Its Healthcare System?” https://www.cnbcafrica.com/videos/2017/09/14/how-can-nigeria-improve-its-healthcare-system/ Opeyemi, Agbaje. 2012. “Health Sector Reforms in Nigeria 1.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvV_xj0meU

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it